9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (9) TMI 507X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (1) M/s. M. Dutta Agency (Customs House Agent) Rs. 2,00,000.00 (2) Shri Mukti Pd. Dutta (Partner of M/s. M. Dutta Agency) Rs. 20,000.00 (3) M/s. Plastic Concern Rs. 50,000.00 (4) Shri Anand Damani (Partner of M/s. Plastic Concern) Rs. 50,000.00 (5) M/s. Raipur Calcutta Road Carriers Rs. 10,000.00 (6) Shri Kanta Pd. Gupta (Owner of the truck) Rs. 10,000.00 2. M/s. RSI Engg. (P) Ltd. have not filed any appeal and are not before us. As such we are not required to pass any orders against the confiscation of the seized goods or imposition of penalty upon the said M/s. RSI. Accordingly we have heard Dr. S. Chakra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... riers have merely transported the goods when they were engaged in the said purpose. They have no knowledge about the contravention of the Customs law, if any, by the importers. As their services were engaged by the importers for transport of the goods, they have done it in the ordinary course of business. Therefore, they cannot be made liable to any penal action under the Customs law. 6. We have also heard Shri V.K. Chaturvedi, ld. SDR appearing for the Revenue who reiterates the reasoning of the order-in-original. 7. We have carefully considered the impugned order and the submissions made by the ld. Advocates. appearing for different parties. 8. As regards M/s. Dutta Agency, who are clearing agents of M/s. RSI Engg. (P) Ltd., the Com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that the appellants have taken a specific stand before the adjudicating authority that they had received delivery of materials from M/s. RSI during the period from 18-1-1993 to July 1993, whereas the goods in question were imported by M/s. RSI under the import licences during the period from 27-9-1993 (sic) to 18-1-1993. As such the goods received by the said appellants cannot be the goods covered by the special advanced licences. There is no rebuttal of the above defence of' the appellant. We also note that DGFT vide order dated 24-7-1995 in respect of the same imports has concluded that M/s. RSI had in its effective possession the entire goods imported against the special four advanced licences up to 23-6-1995. As such we do not find an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
